Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-5.4 Nano vs Qwen3.8 Flash

Qwen3.8 Flash costs 2.7x less per output token than GPT-5.4 Nano ($0.47 vs $1.25 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.

GPT-5.4 NanoOpenAI
Coding
44.8
Overall
45.7
Output $/M
$1.25
Qwen3.8 FlashQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.47
vs $1.25 vs $0.47 per 1M output tokens. Qwen3.8 Flash is 2.7x cheaper.

GPT-5.4 Nano or Qwen3.8 Flash: which to pick

Only GPT-5.4 Nano has a coding score, 44.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen3.8 Flash has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Qwen3.8 Flash for output tokens 2.7x cheaper ($0.47 vs $1.25 per million) and a larger context window (1M against 400K tokens).

No benchmark has tested both yet. GPT-5.4 Nano has results on AA Coding Index, LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) and SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI); Qwen3.8 Flash on LiveBench coding, LiveBench research and LiveBench browser. Compare them on price and context instead.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
GPT-5.4 Nano 44.8 from 2 benchmarks, Qwen3.8 Flash not benchmarked.
Widest category
None yet: no category has been tested on both models.
Widest single gap
None yet: no benchmark has tested both models.
Output price
GPT-5.4 Nano $1.25 against Qwen3.8 Flash $0.47 per million output tokens, 2.7x apart.
Context window
GPT-5.4 Nano takes 400K tokens, Qwen3.8 Flash 1M.

Benchmark by benchmark

Every board either model has a result on, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale. Only one model is measured on each, so no row names a leader.

CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index13 boards measured
Coding benchmarks for GPT-5.4 Nano and Qwen3.8 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 NanoQwen3.8 FlashLeader
LiveBench codingNot measured87.4%Only Qwen3.8 Flash measured
AA Coding Index56.1Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)84.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)69.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)26.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Code migration (Vals AI)14.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)41.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
SciCode47.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)42.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
WeirdML49.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
ALE-Bench1004.5Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: coding1404Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1402Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 26 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards measured
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-5.4 Nano and Qwen3.8 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 NanoQwen3.8 FlashLeader
AA Intelligence Index20.7Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Epoch Capabilities Index146.0Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index9 boards measured
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-5.4 Nano and Qwen3.8 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 NanoQwen3.8 FlashLeader
AA Agentic Index16.0Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LiveBench researchNot measured74.6%Only Qwen3.8 Flash measured
LiveBench browserNot measured48.0%Only Qwen3.8 Flash measured
LiveBench long agenticNot measured37.1%Only Qwen3.8 Flash measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)38.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)5.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)6.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)44.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
τ²-Bench Telecom76.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 32 boards here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index16 boards measured
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-5.4 Nano and Qwen3.8 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 NanoQwen3.8 FlashLeader
GPQA Diamond77.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LiveBench reasoningNot measured87.4%Only Qwen3.8 Flash measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)73.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)81.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)28.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)78.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
ARC-AGI51.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
ARC-AGI-25.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Chess puzzles45.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Mystery game puzzles9.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1381Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: expert1396Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1387Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: diagrams1210Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: homework1225Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark39.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index7 boards measured
Math benchmarks for GPT-5.4 Nano and Qwen3.8 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 NanoQwen3.8 FlashLeader
AIME88.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
OTIS Mock AIME87.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 344.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
FrontierMath, tier 412.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
ProofBench5.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: math1405Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1409Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index12 boards measured
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-5.4 Nano and Qwen3.8 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 NanoQwen3.8 FlashLeader
MMLU Pro77.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)77.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)51.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)61.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)67.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)59.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
MedCode (Vals AI)41.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
SimpleQA Verified11.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: science1374Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1369Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1368Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1366Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
Web design benchmarks for GPT-5.4 Nano and Qwen3.8 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 NanoQwen3.8 FlashLeader
LiveBench designNot measured72.8%Only Qwen3.8 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index32 boards measured
General benchmarks for GPT-5.4 Nano and Qwen3.8 Flash
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 NanoQwen3.8 FlashLeader
LiveBench data analysisNot measured74.2%Only Qwen3.8 Flash measured
SAGE (Vals AI)38.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)77.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Vals Multimodal Index47.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
IFBench75.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)76.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
DTBench80.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMCA36.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text1372Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1362Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1315Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Vision1196Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: English1381Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: non-English1359Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1391Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: German1368Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1343Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: Korean1321Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: French1395Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1371Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: Russian1363Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: Polish1366Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1382Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1365Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1338Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1325Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: English1202Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: Chinese1232Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: reading text1204Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: humor1161Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing things1141Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing1159Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

GPT-5.4 Nano$0.0008Fits in one request
Qwen3.8 Flash$0.0004Fits in one request

Qwen3.8 Flash costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-5.4 Nano$0.014Fits in one request
Qwen3.8 Flash$0.0089Fits in one request

Qwen3.8 Flash costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-5.4 Nano$0.052Fits in one request
Qwen3.8 Flash$0.035Fits in one request

Qwen3.8 Flash costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of GPT-5.4 Nano and Qwen3.8 Flash
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-5.4 NanoQwen3.8 Flash
MakerOpenAIQwen
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedMarch 17, 2026August 26, 2026
Context window400K1M
Input $/Mtok$0.20$0.15
Output $/Mtok$1.25$0.47
Coding index44.8Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it21
Cost per solved task$0.14Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-5.4 Nano better than Qwen3.8 Flash for coding?

Only GPT-5.4 Nano has a coding score, 44.8 on the Vibe Coding Index; Qwen3.8 Flash has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Qwen3.8 Flash for output tokens 2.7x cheaper ($0.47 vs $1.25 per million) and a larger context window (1M against 400K tokens).

Which is cheaper, GPT-5.4 Nano or Qwen3.8 Flash?

GPT-5.4 Nano costs $0.20 per million input tokens and $1.25 per million output tokens; Qwen3.8 Flash costs $0.15 and $0.47. Cost per solved task is known for GPT-5.4 Nano only.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-5.4 Nano or Qwen3.8 Flash?

Qwen3.8 Flash, with 1M tokens against 400K.

Has any benchmark tested both GPT-5.4 Nano and Qwen3.8 Flash?

No benchmark has tested both yet. GPT-5.4 Nano has results on AA Coding Index, LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) and SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI); Qwen3.8 Flash on LiveBench coding, LiveBench research and LiveBench browser. Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 22, 2026.

Compare next